The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1887-06-08
OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
THE REAL FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN
ARE THOSE WHO DEMAND SIX
MONTHS TERMS.

AXE ThUSE WdO DEMAND SIX
MONTHS TERMS.
The ''Newberry Observer Throws q
Loaded BombsIieIl at those who
would close the Public Schools
for the Benefit OF the Teachers
The Public Fund IN for the Benefit
of the Children-DOn't Forget This
Fact.
Perhaps the Observer may be aware Of
the fact that no matter how small part
Of the public money is given TO school
per month, for that month no patron is
compelled to pay tuition. II the. people
who are unable to pay tuition so desire
they can send their children to the school.
and the teacher is compelled to receive
them. The school will be soon over
crowded and the patrons who are paying
will soon withdraw their children and
their money, preferrng school where
their children can receive more attention.
e. e. Britton, Editor Teachers COL
ann IN Marlboro Chronicle.
Newd.'7y Observer.
"Plato, thou reasonest WE'LL" We have
nowhere seem better argument for long
terms.
mo matter how small part of the
public money Is given to school per
month " If the people who are una
BILE to pay tuition so desire, they can send
their children to the school, and the teach
er is compelled to teach them" -.-
Precisely so; and that is just what we
are working for-the education of the
children of those who are "unable to pay
tuition" That is what the free school
nf1k tnl, g. l.,
that it can possibly accomplish. 1t can
accomplish that If those in authority
would follow the law, as they ought to
do, and give to the children of those who
are "unabie to pay tuition" six months
schooling in the year.
What is the two mill tax and the poll
tax for but to pay tuition for the people
who are unable to pay? II all were able
to pay there would be no school tax. The
county treasurer is not simply the medi-
um through which people pay for the
tuition of their own children. If that
were all, they would save the treasurer's
commissions and the school commission
er's salary by paying tuition directly to
the teacher. Why require q property
holder to pay this tax if he is to step right
in and get it back? He does not pay it
for himself; if he did, he would pay it,
not as tax, but as tuition, directly to the
teacher-without the Intervention of any
"free school system"-he pays it as tax
because it is intended for the children
of those not able to pay. Whatever bene-
fit he may get from it is only incidental /;
the primary purpose is for educating tho
poor. 1t is intended by the Constitution,
and expressly so declared, that this school
tax shall give six months schooling each
year; and this six months schooling Is
not intended primarily for those who can
get it without tax, but for those who
cannot. The former get some benefit in
months tuition. But they would get
back just as much if the free schools were
kept open six months.
Teacher Britton makes very dama2-
ing admission when he says If the teacher
is compelled to receive poor pupils be-
cause the school is getting public money,
"the school will soon be overcrowded."
It would be no more crowded for six
months than for three. He evidently
looks upon the free education of the poor
children as al evil to be borne as short
time as possible.
The Superintendent of Education for
years past has lamented in his annual
Report the "short" terms, and recon-
mended an additional Especial tax' to
make them longer. The terms have been
short because the Constitution has
been ignored. They could have been six
months justas well as three or three and
half.
Suppose C "special' tax were levied
sufficient to run the schools for six
months without tuition from any ooGy.
Who would gain by it? Those who can't
pay now couldn't pay then, and those
who pay now would have to pay the
whole of the Especial tax" and it would
be no saving to them for it is just as
easy for them to pay tuition" directly
to the teacher.
"term" shall last only so long as the
school fund will pay the tuition Of all the
children-those who are able to pay AS
well as those who are not. They say If
you want longer torn, levy a special
tax. Have they ever computed the cost
of running school six months accord
ing to the present plan of running it
three and half? 1t would require
fund of $3.50, 900 more-or tax Of nearly
mills additional.
We are quite sure the property-holders
would prefer to pay tuition, as they now
do, rather than pay this additional "spe-
cial tax" and get tuition free.
The real opponents Of the free school
system are those who would make
and those who do make the State Super
intendent and the County School Com
missioners simply educational bro kers or
commission merchants-tor receiving and
paying out tuition fees for o specified
salary-for doing what the people could
better do for themselves and at the same
time saye the salary of the Superintend-
ent and thirty-four School Commission
ers, besides other incidentals.
The real friends of the free school sys-
tenn are those who insist that the school
fund. whatever else it may do, shall give
at least six months schooling to children
whose parents are "unable to pay tut
tion," as the Constitution prescribes.
A Word from Peter Cooper.